A Stern State of Mind
As everyone should at this point be well aware of, the NBA lockout has officially ended. The CBA is ratified, players are back in training camp and preseason games are beginning as early as Friday. Finally, the NBA season is upon us. Yet, since the end of the lockout and the beginning of training camps and free agency last Friday, there has been a growing sentiment around the league regarding the handling of league transactions post-lockout.
As is common in the "Big 4" sports in the United States, teams are owned by owners. These owners are typically wealthy individuals who have the means to purchase a professional sports franchise. However, often teams lose money even when the league itself is doing well (except the NFL of course). Such is the case with the NBA and one of the primary reasons that led to the NBA lockout. In recent years, a number of NBA franchises have been bleeding money and they have not been turning profits. Recent estimates from pre-lockout numbers were that some teams were losing as much as $30 million per season. The new terms of the ratified CBA were aimed at preventing such losses and ensuring profits for all 30 NBA teams.
However, when teams are losing money, owners often are forced or sometimes choose by their own volition to sell their teams. Such was the case, interestingly enough, with the New Orleans Hornets. The Hornets, as of yet have still not found a buyer and were subsequently bought by the NBA when the team was sold. So what does this mean? Well it means that David Stern, the commissioner and overriding voice of the NBA became the ad-hoc owner of the New Orleans Hornets.
Now we all know from past history how concerned David Stern is with league image and such but his dealings with the Hornets as their default owner have taken on a different dimension. It should be noted though that while the Hornets are owned the NBA, they still have a board of executives like any other team, a team president like any other team and a general manager like any other team. However, we all know, especially from the case of Carmelo going to the Knicks, that owners have the final say in deciding if a trade gets done or not. Not the coach, not the team president and especially not the general manager (sorry Dell Demps).
So when Chris Paul was demanding a trade even before the free agency period started last Friday, everyone was under the assumption that he would indeed be traded. And traded he was. Twice. You see, when you allow an NBA commissioner to run an NBA team, you lose the competitive balance that you would expect from an "unbiased" team owner (James Dolan excluded). The general reasons for a trade are either for improving your team or for money purposes. In this case, trading Chris Paul was seen as a measure for the Hornets to improve their roster while also releasing their greatest asset. I'll make one thing clear. I have no problem with Chris Paul going to the Clippers. I think it's a reasonably good trade for both sides. The Clippers seem to finally be relevant and the Hornets get some good pieces including rising star Eric Gordon and big man Chris Kaman. Essentially, the trade as a win-win for both sides given the situation.
However, the trade should have never happened in the first place. We all know the conspiracy theories surrounding the first proposed and initially agreed upon Hornets-Lakers trade involving Chris Paul, Lamar Odom and Pau Gasol along with Luis Scola and Kevin Martin from the Rockets. Again, a good trade for the Hornets and perhaps an unbalanced trade for the Lakers given the uncertainty of Paul and Kobe being on the same court at the same time. Yet, we all know that was not the reason the trade failed to go through. Let me make another thing clear. I know that the NBA ultimately has final say on any trade because all league transactions must go through the commissioner's office. Commissioner's office? Do you see the glaring issue with that? It's plain and clear to see so I won't point it out. To assume that there was some type of collusion with this failed trade is an understatement. We all saw the angry email from Dan Gilbert, which surely could not have been the only "informal" complaint Stern received regarding the trade. For us to believe Stern's claim that he did not succumb to any pressure to pull the plug on the deal from the owners but instead chose to terminate the deal for "basketball related reasons" is sheer hypocrisy. The deal was pulled because Stern did not like it. Keep in mind though that Stern can pull the plug on any deal whether it involves the Hornets or any of the other 29 teams in the league completing some kind of trade. He wanted a deal that would make him look good. That means a deal for his own personal gain and his own personal benefit. This new deal to the Clippers is not really about making either team better (which it ironically does in many ways). It's about ensuring that the Hornets will be financially and "physically" attractive to buyers come bidding time. Bravo, Mr. Stern.
We could argue and debate all night about the failed trade and its implications but one thing is certainly clear. Stern, whether you like it or not, is the commissioner of the NBA and the owner of the Hornets and he is going to run the team the way that he wants for as long as he can. Not the way that Chris Paul wants or Kobe Bryant or Dell Demps wants or anyone else wants. If that means infuriating players and owners by dangling players at his own will, then so be it. Hell, this is the NBA. And it's in a Stern state of mind.
As is common in the "Big 4" sports in the United States, teams are owned by owners. These owners are typically wealthy individuals who have the means to purchase a professional sports franchise. However, often teams lose money even when the league itself is doing well (except the NFL of course). Such is the case with the NBA and one of the primary reasons that led to the NBA lockout. In recent years, a number of NBA franchises have been bleeding money and they have not been turning profits. Recent estimates from pre-lockout numbers were that some teams were losing as much as $30 million per season. The new terms of the ratified CBA were aimed at preventing such losses and ensuring profits for all 30 NBA teams.
However, when teams are losing money, owners often are forced or sometimes choose by their own volition to sell their teams. Such was the case, interestingly enough, with the New Orleans Hornets. The Hornets, as of yet have still not found a buyer and were subsequently bought by the NBA when the team was sold. So what does this mean? Well it means that David Stern, the commissioner and overriding voice of the NBA became the ad-hoc owner of the New Orleans Hornets.
Now we all know from past history how concerned David Stern is with league image and such but his dealings with the Hornets as their default owner have taken on a different dimension. It should be noted though that while the Hornets are owned the NBA, they still have a board of executives like any other team, a team president like any other team and a general manager like any other team. However, we all know, especially from the case of Carmelo going to the Knicks, that owners have the final say in deciding if a trade gets done or not. Not the coach, not the team president and especially not the general manager (sorry Dell Demps).
So when Chris Paul was demanding a trade even before the free agency period started last Friday, everyone was under the assumption that he would indeed be traded. And traded he was. Twice. You see, when you allow an NBA commissioner to run an NBA team, you lose the competitive balance that you would expect from an "unbiased" team owner (James Dolan excluded). The general reasons for a trade are either for improving your team or for money purposes. In this case, trading Chris Paul was seen as a measure for the Hornets to improve their roster while also releasing their greatest asset. I'll make one thing clear. I have no problem with Chris Paul going to the Clippers. I think it's a reasonably good trade for both sides. The Clippers seem to finally be relevant and the Hornets get some good pieces including rising star Eric Gordon and big man Chris Kaman. Essentially, the trade as a win-win for both sides given the situation.
However, the trade should have never happened in the first place. We all know the conspiracy theories surrounding the first proposed and initially agreed upon Hornets-Lakers trade involving Chris Paul, Lamar Odom and Pau Gasol along with Luis Scola and Kevin Martin from the Rockets. Again, a good trade for the Hornets and perhaps an unbalanced trade for the Lakers given the uncertainty of Paul and Kobe being on the same court at the same time. Yet, we all know that was not the reason the trade failed to go through. Let me make another thing clear. I know that the NBA ultimately has final say on any trade because all league transactions must go through the commissioner's office. Commissioner's office? Do you see the glaring issue with that? It's plain and clear to see so I won't point it out. To assume that there was some type of collusion with this failed trade is an understatement. We all saw the angry email from Dan Gilbert, which surely could not have been the only "informal" complaint Stern received regarding the trade. For us to believe Stern's claim that he did not succumb to any pressure to pull the plug on the deal from the owners but instead chose to terminate the deal for "basketball related reasons" is sheer hypocrisy. The deal was pulled because Stern did not like it. Keep in mind though that Stern can pull the plug on any deal whether it involves the Hornets or any of the other 29 teams in the league completing some kind of trade. He wanted a deal that would make him look good. That means a deal for his own personal gain and his own personal benefit. This new deal to the Clippers is not really about making either team better (which it ironically does in many ways). It's about ensuring that the Hornets will be financially and "physically" attractive to buyers come bidding time. Bravo, Mr. Stern.
We could argue and debate all night about the failed trade and its implications but one thing is certainly clear. Stern, whether you like it or not, is the commissioner of the NBA and the owner of the Hornets and he is going to run the team the way that he wants for as long as he can. Not the way that Chris Paul wants or Kobe Bryant or Dell Demps wants or anyone else wants. If that means infuriating players and owners by dangling players at his own will, then so be it. Hell, this is the NBA. And it's in a Stern state of mind.
posted by Jared Dubro | 12:34 AM
|
0 Comments
